Thank you again, Greg! Yeah, I think I probably got out beyond my depth in the economic aspect. The way I’ve been reading about it is a general trend that has looked to autonomy, hypermobility, individual responsibility, competition as solutions in education. I think it absolutely is related to socioeconomic trends such as the erosion of the welfare state, Reaganism, Thatcherism, privatization, etc. Fundamentally, this has led to questioning if education is something to which citizens are universally entitled.

Within this emerging sphere, we seem to be seeing a lot of intermediate stages. All of these challenge the notion of schools as providing anything more but a product for consumption. And much of the rhetoric emphasizes that it is a poor product. Paired with unprecedented levels of inspection and assessment (courtesy of the testing regime), it’s not hard to see how the universal public school is being set up to fail and be replaced with more market-driven options. Probably the many private-public partnerships we see popping up in education is a symptom of this so-called “middle way” you mention (in addition to their own schools, Summit is pursuing this angle as well). In anticipation of this brave new world, we must move students toward a conception of themselves as individual agents, consumers who will have full responsibility to choose their own learning product. Without dismissing the movement entirely, I can’t ignore that personalized learning at least been used as support for this trend.

Right back at you and happy new year! 🤜🤛🥂